k" -^r^ cy • 4 



^. 












.<^ 



"K 



oV 



N^O^ 



^^-n^ . 
■^ ^'^ <>"' 






-. %.^^ yM^'^ %/ *<srs'. *^ .« .V 






yr**^^ 






♦ AT 



V ,. o " • * *<n Ay 



^^ ' :'M£:> \„./' /JUfe'v %.*^ ' ,'I 



v-^^ 
















* «7 '^^ . 



































^J J°- 






V-O^ 



•oK 



.^^ 











'. -^^n^ «* 













^v^. 









'; J'% 









%* ,^0 



9^ w*. - 



o. ".', 1*' aO" ''V* "oVo' 










SPEECH 



OF 



Hon. J. B. Foraker 

BEFORE THE 

Richland County Lincoln Association 

AT 

MANSFIELD, OHIO 
FEBRUARY 12, 1914 



After some remarks having a local application, including a 
kind mention of the late Senator Sherman, whose home was 
at Mansfield, Senator Foraker said : 

The purpose of celebrating Lincoln Day is to i)ay tribute 
to the memory of that remarkable man and to draw from the 
lessons of his life inspiration, and rules for our guidance, with 
respect to the duties of the present and the future. 

I can remember when only his party followers, and not all 
of them thought him great. That was true not only when he 
was elected President of the United States, but at the very 
time when he was giving to the country some of the most 
signal services he rendered. 

Now he is conceded not only by all classes of citizens, but 
by all the peoples, of every class, throughout all the world, to 
be one of the greatest men of all time; and this estimate is 
just, whether measured by his achievements, as they appear 
in the light r-f subsequent history, or whetiier measured by 



what he in fact was as a man, a citizen, a patriot, a states- 
man, and a chief executive. 

Had he never been President we probably never would 
have known, certainl}^ not in their full measure, his wonderful 
powers of mind, or his still more wonderful temperament, 
patience, moral courage, sympathy and self control. 

The experiences to which he was subjected brought all 
these qualities forth as the night brings out the stars. 

When he was elected President we knew him only as a 
man who had passed from the humblest to the highest station 
in our American life so quickly and with so little test of his 
intellectual endowment, and with so limited an experience in 
public affairs, that there was wide spread apprehension even 
among his friends, that he would not prove equal to the usual 
duties of the office. 

When, therefore, immediately following his election the 
war clouds began to gather, apprehension changed to fear, 
and became well nigh universal that he would prove wholly 
inadequate to the emergencies that were arising. 

It is almost impossible for even those who lived through 
those exciting days to recall their anxieties, or to realize what 
perplexing situations were precipitated, one after another, by 
the on-rushing tide of untoward and unprecedented events. 

There had never before occurred anything like what was 
then transpiring. Therefore, no one preceding him had 
blazed a way in which he could walk to meet the troubles he 
must overcome. 

The powers of our government, then but little developed 
beyond the express provisions of the Constitution, had never 
been put to any serious test ; and in large measure those 
which he was soon to be compelled to exercise were disputed 
by many, and distrusted by nearly all his countrymen. 

'When we today, in the light of subsequent developments, 
recall the Civil ^Var, and his part in it, we are apt to think of 
only a great struggle, resulting in the preservation of the 
Union, and the abolition of slavery; and that while success- 
fully directed, yet, after all, his duty was plain, and that 

2 

^^.^ 







prcroably any other reasonably well equipped man would 
have ordered out the troops as he did, and achieved the same 
general results. 

We do not appreciate his work until we recall that he not 
only had to fight enemies but also resist friends. First, there 
were the four border Slave States of Delaware, Maryland, 
Kentucky, and Missouri, that did not secede, but which stood 
"trembling in the balance" during the first year of the War, 
prevented from joining their sister States in rebellion, as the 
more radical portion of their population almost unitedly de- 
sired they should do, by the former \\'higs, who, altliough 
pro-slavery in sentiment, yet preferred the old Union to the 
new Slave oligarchy. 

Inconsiderate or premature action on the part of the Ad- 
ministration would surely have lost to the Union cause the 
great moral force of these States remaining loyal, and c con- 
vcrso would certainly have given to the Southern Confed- 
eracy an added strength that would probably have secured 
for it a recognition of belligerency, if not of mdependence, 
at the hands of England, France, and other nations of Eu- 
rope. 

A mistake in dealing with these States or the questions af- 
fecting them would probably have been fatal. 

History establishes that Mr. Lincoln saw more clearly than 
any member of his Cabinet, than any member of Congress, 
than any of tlie leading newspaper men of the country; more 
clearly in short than anybody else, not only the necessity of so 
directing the Government as to prevent the secession of these 
border States, but of, at the same time, holding to his loyal 
support tens of thousands of men in the States of the North 
who were willing to do all in their ix)wer to save the Union 
l:)ut who, at the same time, would have i>eremptorily refused 
to do anything to destroy slavery in the States where it al- 
ready existed. 

It was most difficult to determine from time to time how 
far he could go in aggressive defense of the Union without 
driving the border States into rebellion. INTost unexpectedly he 



was confronted by a similar difficulty among some of his own 
leading Party followers, who, seeing one State after another 
seceding, and preparing for and threatening War, suddenly 
broke out in a loud demand that if necessary to prevent 
bloodshed he should consent to disunion, and thus bring ship- 
wreck to his administration, even before it was inaugurated, 
and at the same time shipwreck to all the hopes and aspira- 
tions centered in our experiment of liberty and free, popular 
self government. 

Perhaps, no newspapers had done more than Williani 
Lloyd Garrison's "Liberator," the leading abolition organ of 
the time, the New York Tribune, edited by Horace Greely, 
and the Albany Evening Journal, Thurlow Weed's paper, 
to arouse sentiment against slavery, and bring about the 
formation of the Republican Party, and the election of Mr. 
Lincoln. These editors above most men of their time, had 
responsibility for what had come to pass. 

On this account Mr. Lincoln had every right to expect 
from them recognition of hs leadership and an earnest and 
loyal support of his Administration; so long, at least, as 
nothing was done, or attempted by him, in conflict with the 
principles he and they had advocated : but rather they seemed 
to think he was their creation and it was their right and duty 
to map out and direct and control his policies. 

Therefore, even before South Carolina, the first of the Con- 
federate States to secede, had acted, these papers, with numer- 
ous others of nn'nor importance, which they influenced, seeing 
the storm that was rising, and that War was inevitable, if 
coercion should be attempted, commenced a campaign of com- 
promise, conciliation and flat surrender, that now seems 
almost incredible. 

They made embarrassing haste to enter upon their self- 
assumed task of taking Mr. Lincoln and his administration 
in charge. 

The extent and character of this panic and demoralization 
is now almost unbelievable, but some measure of its nature 
and intensity may be gathered from a glance at the columns 



of the Tribune, which from day to day teemed with such sen- 
timents as "that if the cotton States shall decide that they can 
do better out of the Union than, in it, we insist on letting 
them go in peace;" that while the "Tribune" denied the right 
of nullification, yet it did admit that "to withdraw from the 
Union is quite another matter;" that "when a considerable 
section of our Union shall deliberately resolve to go out, we 
shall resist all coercive measures designed to keep them in;" 
that he was "adverse to the employment of military force to 
fasten one section of our Confederacy to the other ;" and 
that "if eight States, having five millions of people, choose to 
separate from us, they cannot be pertnanently withheld from 
so doing by federal cannon." 

"If the Cotton States choose to form an independent nation 
they have a clear, moral right to do so;" and that if "the 
great body of the Southern people" become alienated from the 
Union, and wish to "escape from it, we will do our best to 
forward their views." 

The other papers mentioned were even worse; but enough 
has been quoted to show how the leading newspapers instead 
of waiting for the leader to speak, were taking the situation 
into their own hands, and to the full measure of their in- 
fluence, making his task impossible. 

He listened to all, considered all, but remained both silent, 
and steadfast. He refused to be either frightened or forced 
to speak prematurely. 

He knew that his time had not yet come to speak with 
authority, and he preferred not to speak at all until he could 
speak as the Chief Executive of the Nation. 

THE FIRST INAUGURAL. 

He realized, however, that in his inaugural he would be 
expected to set forth an intelligent policy with respect to the 
great questions at issue. He did not disappoint this expecta- 
tion. He met it squarely, and comprehensively; and yet, so 
simply and naturally that his whole policy could be stated in 



a sentence, and be universally understood. In brief, clear and 
direct language he set forth that he deemed it his first and 
paramount duty and purpose to save the Union; and that he 
did not consider himself authorized to interfere with slavery 
in the States where it already existed, and that he had no 
purpose of doing anything of the kind, unless compelled to do 
so to save the Union. 

At the same time, without mentioning them, he explicitly 
but calmly answered the "peace at any price" demands. "The 
Union of these States is perpetual." * * * "]\jo State upon 
its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union." * * 
* * "I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly 
enjoins me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed 
in all the States." * * * * "j gj^^jj ^^ ^^ jj^ j^y p^^ver 
to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging 
to the country, and to collect the duties and imposts." 

He closed by making to the people of the seceding States 
this vain ap^jeal : "We are not enemies, but friends. We 
must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it 
must not break our bonds of affection." 

lliroughout, his address was wise, kind and forgiving, yet 
full of serious import. The South saw in it a fixed deter- 
mination to prevent the consummation of their conspiracy. 
To the North it brought a restoration of confidence and hope 
by making it clear that at last there was at the head of the 
Government a man of clear conception, full knowledge, self- 
reliant character, and unalterable purpose, who refused to be 
stampeded by either friends or enemies. 

It would be im|X)ssible to make clearer than he himself 
made it the policy to be pursued, but if comment be permitted 
it may be said that foreseeing war, and determning in ad- 
vance of that calamity the ix)sition our Government should 
assume he sought to confine the approaching struggle to the 
preservation of the Union, and thus eliminate the fears of all 
who, friendly to slavery, were yet ready to stand with him 
on a Union platform, if. in doing so, they would not be re- 
c|uired to assist in the destruction of that institution. 



At the same time that he thus sought to quiet the pro- 
slavery Union men, he gave warning that he would save the 
Union at any cost, even the destruction of slavery; that, as 
he afterward felicitously said, he would "save the Union 
with slavery, if he could; without slavery, if he must." 
He thus laid down as his platform two simple, yet compre- 
hensive propositions; one absolute, and the other conditional. 
The preservation of the Union at all hazards; the destruction 
of slavery, if necessary to the accomplishment of the primary 
purpose. 

He thus gave himself chart and compass for all the tem- 
pestuous seas through which he was to sail; for these two 
propositions embrace all there was of both purpose and policy ; 
all the rest was detail. Thus he paved the way, broad and 
clear, for the whole, long, bloody march to Emancipation and 
Appomattox. 

The thousand and one harrassing and distressing questions 
with which he had to contend as to when and how this, that, 
or the other thing should be done; the raising of armies, the 
appointment of Generals, their field operations, the placating 
of disappointed and dissatisfied friends, were but the attendant 
circumstances, trials and tribulations of execution, in which 
work he never faltered. 

The War quickly came. Ft. Sumter was fired upon, and 
that fired all patriotic hearts. "Peace at any price" advocates 
either became coercionists, or ceased to obtrude their un- 
popular views. Instead of "all for peace" at any price, all 
were for war "at any cost," no matter what. 

Mr. Lincoln's trouble for the next year was to hold back 
the march of events until the Armies could be organized and 
made effective, and until public sentiment, enlightened and 
educated, could be relied upon to sustain the blow at slavery, 
which he early foresaw was inevitable. 

As time passed the sentiment in favor of destroying slavery 
grew stronger and stronger. At the same time it became 
clearer and clearer to Mr. Lincoln that sooner or later such 
action would become necessary. 



EMANCIPATION. 

As early as July 22, 1862, he laid before his cabinet in con- 
fidence his purpose to issue a Proclamation of Emancipation 
and a general draft of what he proposed to say. 

It was favorably considered, but it was thought best to 
defer issuing it until some victory had been won for the 
Union Army so that it might not look like a despairing al- 
ternative and thus probably do more harm than good. 

The time came, according to this program, when the Battle 
of Antietam had been fought, and won, in September of that 
year: but in the meanwhile the most ardent of Mr. Lincoln's 
supix>rters became more and more impatient, insistent, and 
fault-finding, because he did not take the step upon which, 
without their knowledge, he had already detemiined. 

In this emergency Mr. Greely knew exactly what should be 
done. He had ceased preaching "peace at any price," and. 
going to the opposite extreme, had become the exponent of 
the most radical thought of the hour. 

He printed in the New York Tribune what he called "The 
Appeal of Twenty Millions of Americans." 

He had these "twenty millions," by the language he em- 
ployed, call upon Abraham Lincoln as their public servant and 
representative to discharge his official and imperative duty 
with respect to Emancipation in accordance with the terms of 
the Confiscation Act, which Congress had passed. 

Mr. Lincoln made immediate answer in language worthy 
of reproduction in its entirety, but for present purposes it is 
im|X)ssible to do more than quote briefly, and this I do only 
to show how clearly he still had in mind his policy as an- 
nounced in his Inaugural, and how unfalteringly and intelli- 
gently he was pursuing it. 

He said among other things : . 

"I would save the Union. I would save it in the 
shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner 
that National authority can be restored, the nearer 
the Union will be tbe 'LTnion as it was.' If there be 

8 



those who would not save the Union unless they 
could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree 
with them. If there be those who would not save 
the Union unless they could at the same time de- 
stroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My para- 
mount object in this struggle is to save the Union, 
and is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I 
could save the Union w'ithout freeing any slave, 1 
would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the 
slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by free- 
ing some and leaving others alone, I would also do 
that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race 
I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; 
and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not be- 
lieve it would help to save the Union. I shall do 
less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts 
the cause; and I shall do more whenever I shall 
believe doing more will help the cause. I shall 
try to correct errors when shown to be errors, 
and I shall adopt new views so far as they shall ap- 
pear to be true views. I have here stated my pur- 
pose according to my view of official duty, and I in- 
tend no modification of my oft expressed personal 
wish that all men everywhere could be free." 

This letter read everywhere had a quieting effect upon the 
dissatisfied. It showed his sympathies were all against slav- 
ery, and that he was but awaiting events. 

A few weeks later the Battle of Antietam was fought and 
won. In accordance with the program agreed upon at the 
Cabinet meeting in July he then issued the Proclamation. 
Thus that great step was delayed until it was plain to all 
that either it or the Union must perish ; until every man who 
placed the salvation of the Union above the preservation of 
slavery could see and fully realize that such a step could no 
longer be averted or postponed. 

Generally speaking, the Anny was pleased with the Procla- 
mation, and, apparently, judging from the newspapers, there 
was a favorable response throughout the North; but when 
the elections of October, only a month later, were held they 



disclosed a most disappointing political situation. Indiana, 
Ohio, New York, and even Pennsylvania went Democratic, by 
large majorities. 

This was everywhere regarded as a condemnation of the 
Administration, and particularly of Emancipation. 

Mr, Lincoln was made the subject of all kinds of criticism, 
abuse, defamation and denunciation. These attacks upon 
him were accompanied with loud and offensive demands that 
he recall his proclamation and undo what had been done. 

But when he sent his message to Congress in December he 
again showed that he had clearly in mind his policy as out- 
lined in his inaugural, and that it was still his unwavering 
purpose to pursue it to the end. 

After reviewing the whole situation in kind and temperate 
lansruage he concluded his message as follows: 



'&' 



"I shall not attempt to retract or modify the 
Emancipation Proclamation; nor shall I return to 
slavery any i>erson who is free by the terms of that 
Proclamation ; or by any of the Acts of Congress." 



For months following the Armies in the field met with dis- 
appointment and doubtful and indifferent results. 

Finally, however, a great change was wrought in the mili- 
tary situation. It was wrought in a day. On the fourth day 
of July, 1863, Grant captured Vicksburg, and Meade defeated 
Tee at Gettysburg. 

These two great victories marked the turning point of the 
struggle, but this fact' was not then realized, and so there 
were more dark days and more bitter discouragements to 
follow. 

The burdens and bereavements of the War had become so 
heavy, and distressing that it took more than these great vic- 
tories to turn public sentiment from pessimism to optimism. 
Dissatisfaction was general and daily found expression. 

All over the country what were called "Union Mass Meet- 

10 



ings" were held at which disheartening and criticising resoki- 
tions were passed. In this way enhstments were retarded, 
and incalculable harm was done. 

Such a meeting was held in August, 1863, at Sprmg-held, 
111 That being- Mr. Lincoln's home he was mvited to be 
present To show how patiently and intelligently, steadfastly 
and hopefully, through good report and bad report he was 
still adhering to the platform he had adopted at the begin- 
ning, I quote briefly from the answer he gave to this mvita- 
tion : 

* * * -There are those who are dissatisfied 
with me. To such I would say: You desire peace, 
and you blame me that we do not have it. But hojv 
can we attain it? There are but three conceivable 
ways. First, to suppress the Rebellion by force of 
arms. This I am trying to do. Are you for it 
If you are, so far we are agreed. If you are not foi 
if a second way is to give up the Union. I am 
against this. Are you for it? If you are, you 
should say so plainly. If you are not for force not 
vet for dissolution, there remains only some imagin- 
able compromise. I do not believe any compromise 
embracing the maintenance of the Union is now pos- 
sible " * * * "You dislike the Emancipation 
Proclamation, and perhaps would have it retracted. 
You say it is unconstitutional. I think difterentl). 
* * * But the Proclamation as law, either is 
valid, or it is not valid. If it is not valid it needs 
no retraction. If it is valid it cannot be retracted 
any more than the dead can be brought to life. 

* You say you will not fight to free Negroes. 
Some of them seem willing to fight for you; but no 
matter Fight you, then, exclusively, to save the 
Union I issued the Proclamation on purpose to 
aid you in saving the Union. Whenever ^jou sha 
have conquered all resistance to the Union, if I shall 
urge you to continue fighting, it will be an apt time 
thfn lo declare that you will not fight to free Ne- 
groes. I thought that in your struggle for the Un 
ion to whatever extent the Negro should cease help- 

11 



ing the enemy to that extent it weakened the enemy 
in his reistance to you. Do you think differently? 
I thought that whatever Negroes can be got to do 
as soldiers, leaves just so much less for white sol- , 
diers to do in saving the Union. Does it appear 
otherwise to you? But. Negroes, like other people, 
act upon motives. Why should they do anything for 
us, if we will do nothing for them? If they stake 
their lives for us they must be prompted by the 
strongest motives, even the promise of freedom. 
And the promise being made must be kept." * * 

Finally the last year of the War came and the last cam- 
paigns were entered upon. Grant commenced hewing his way 
through the wilderness and Sherman started upon his great 
campaign against Atlanta. Both Armies were winning vic- 
tories, and making progress, but the chorus of dissatisfaction 
continued. The fault-finders had a new subject of complaint : 
Grant was sacrificing too many lives ; he was making the war 
too bloody; he was a "butcher and a brute." He must be 
stopped; and so again the cry was raised for "peace at any 
price," and that Mr. Lincoln should inaugurate negotiations 
therefor. 

Horace Greely, a veritable Job's Comforter, again came to 
the front with suggestions, advice, remonstrance and com- 
mand. 

He wrote to Mr. Lincoln, among other things: "Our 
bleeding, bankrupt, almost dying, country longs for peace ; 
shudders at the prospect of fresh conscriptions, of further 
wholesale devastations and of new rivers of human blood." 

It was Presidential year. Mr. Lincoln had been renom- 
inated. He needed and deserv^ed encouragement, but in Au- 
gust. 1864, in the very midst of the political contest, and when 
the War was the bloodiest, and most serious, but yet pro- 
gressing, according to the judgment of all careful, thoughtful 
men, to a successful issue, Mr. Greely wrote to Mr. Lincoln : 

"Nine-tenths of the whole American people, North 
and South, are anxious for peace — peace on almost 

12 



any terms— and utterly sick of human slaughter and 
devastation. I know that, to the general eye, it 
now seems that the rebels are anxious to negotiate, 
and that we repulse their advances. I know that if 
this impression be not removed we shall be beaten 
out of sight next November." * * * "I firmly 
believe were the election to take place tomorrow the 
Democratic majority in this State, and Pennsyl- 
vania, would amount to a hundred thousand, and 
that we should lose Connecticut also." * * * 
"I beg you, implore you, to inaugurate or invite 
proposals for peace forthwith." 

Finally it was suggested that another Convention should 
be held for the purpose of nominating another candidate to 
take the place of Lincoln on the Republican Union ticket. 

Mr. Greely had views upon this proposition also. He was 
never without views, and seemingly always anxious to express 
them; especially when they would do most harm. He gave 
the public the benefit of them through the columns of the 
Tribune. One of his utterances was. and there were many 
like it: "Mr. Lincoln is already beaten. He cannot be 
elected, and we must have another ticket to save us from 
utter overthrow." 

These expressions of public sentiment were not only 
showered upon Mr. Lincoln but General Grant was also 
flooded with them. He got a great deal of advice that did 
not come to him from official sources. 

It was at this time that Mr. Lincoln sent to General Grant 
a telegram, which in the light of all these circumstances, has 
an important historic significance, as showing how unmoved 
he was by the hysteria that surrounded him. The telegram 
was not made public at that time, but it is found in the official 
records of the War. Its language indicates the complete un- 
derstanding between him and General Grant, and their mutual 
confidence in each other. Mr. Lincoln said in this dispatch : 
"* * * Hold on with a bull dog grip and chew and 
choke as much as possible." 

13 



Ill the meanwhile Grant was hammering away. "Chewing 
and choking." 

It is impossible to over-estimate how much we owe to 
these two men — Lincoln and Grant — for our salvation. The 
hour was never so dark that either faltered for one second 
in the prosecution of the great purpose to which they were 
committed of saving our Union and institutions from over- 
throw and destruction. 

Neither one of them ever thought of such folly as at- 
tempting to undo Emancipation, or to retrace any of the 
important steps that had been taken. 

THE DARKEST DAY. 

Light was close at hand, but what was perhaps the darkest 
day was yet to come. 

It was the 29th day of August, 1864. On that day the 
Democratic National Convention met in Chicago and there 
nominated George B. McClellan for the Presidency on a 
platform written by Clement L. Vallandigham of Ohio, 
which declared that the war was a "failure," and demanded 
an "immediate cessation of hostilities." 

This nomination and this platform excited terror in even 
the stoutest Union hearts. 

McClellan and his followers were correspondingly elated 
with anticipated victory in November. Their rejoicing was. 
however, of short duration. 

Three days later, the country was electrified by the publica- 
tion of a telegram from Sherman announcing that "Atlanta 
is ours, and fairh* won." 

This in itself was enough to destroy the Chicago platform, 
but there was more to come, and lots of it. 

Almost simultaneously Sheridan commenced his remarkable 
campaign in the Shenandoah Valle}-, and one great victory 
after another was heralded, until on the 19th day of October 
he made his famous ride "from Winchester town twenty 
miles away," and turned a tide of disaster into one of the 
most inspiriting victories of the War. 

14 



The whole country was aroused. Pessimism gave way to 
optimism and all along the line there was a new mfusion of 
couraee, spirit and determination. 

The words that were to have insured Democratic victory 
became words of crucifixion, because day by day more and 
more it became manifest that the war was not a failure, and 
that a demand for an immediate cessation of hostilities was 

but treason itself. . ... 

Greely and all his colleagues in criticism stopped their ill- 
considered advice. , 
The protest against Grant's mode of warfare paled and 
faded awav altogether. Nobody any longer talked of peace, 
but all urged a vigorous prosecution of the war. 

Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, Meade and Thomas, and all 
the great fighting Generals at once became heroes-not a 
"bloody butclier" among them. 

The end was soon reached. The Union was saved Slav- 
ery was abolished, and in due time the Constitution was 
am'ended to correspond with all that had been acconrpl.hed 

Thus was fulfilled to the letter the promises and pledges 
that constituted the intelligent, wise .^^"-^^^^"^f'?" 
policy announced by Mr. Lincoln in his mauguial address, 
'lie did not live to see the end. In the very moment of 
his triumph he was stricken down; but he lived long enough 
to se his work was to be crowned with success, and long 
enough to teach a lesson of incalculable worth - '— « 
the necessity for patience and devotion to duty in the execu 
tion of even the wisest and best of purposes. 

He lived through his most trying and exasperating ex- 
periences, without once, so far as history records, losing his 
temper, or losing his courage. 

His State papers are remarkable specimens of logic, persua- 
sion and good English. They are consistent and harmonious 
hroughoul Thev are all on a high and dignified plane. 
Tl!y are all free 'from unnecessary verbiage, »" "-"'f '^>' 
fr^'from all attempt, even the slightest, to speak beyond the 
l-eTuiremenls of the occasion, or to s,«ak m any kind of 

15 



language, except only that which was the simplest, plainest, 
most direct, and most natural. 

Almost all his utterances are classical. 

The short speech, only two or tliree paragraphs, made by 
him to his fellow townsmen of Springfield, III, when he bade 
them goodbye, as he started to Washington to assume the 
duties of the Presidency; his letter to Mrs. Bixby, the mother 
of five sons killed in battle; and his Gettysburg speech will 
forever hold the very highest rank among the gems of Eng- 
lish literature. 

We do well to remember and honor such a man. We do 
well to study his character, both public and private, and to 
invite a like study upon the part of the young men who are 
in their day and generation to control the government, and 
determine the destinies of our people, and our institutions. 

He had such kindness of heart, such breadth of considera- 
tion and charity in his judgment of men; such ever present 
and all commanding human sympathy united with such won- 
derful intellectual force, such powers of analysis and argu- 
ment, that he well deserved the high place he holds in history. 

LINCOLN, PRODUCT OF OLD-TIME METHODS. 

And yet this wonderful man was chosen not only to the 
Presidency but also to the other offices he filled in the old 
fashioned way, and in the old fashioned time, when political 
parties fiercely contended for supremacy, and in preparation 
therefor held delegate conventions where they discussed and 
adopted platforms, and then nominated candidates to repre- 
sent them and their principles. He belonged to that time 
when parties printed, and used at the elections, tickets on 
which the names of their candidates were placed under Party 
names and Party emblems; and at a time when such a thing 
as a short ballot was never mentioned nor even thought of 
as necessary to the intelligent exercise of the right of 
suffrage; and, good as he was, and great as he was, he did 
not stand alone in .that respect. 

16 



On the contrary, all the greatest and most illustrious names 
in American history are those of men cliosen by the people 
to represent the people, and act for the people in the self- 
same way. Webster, Sumner, Giddings, Sherman, Thunnan. 
Tilden, and in that still more remote day, Jefiferson, Madison, 
Jackson, and their respective associates in public life were all 
brought forward and commissioned for the public service in 
til at same manner. 

No one had then learned that the Recall, or the Initiative, 
or the Referendum was necessary under our form of Govern- 
ment. Neither had anybody yet found it necessary to resort 
to Commissions as agencies in the administration of our Gov- 
ernment. Now all these ideas are familiar. 

It may be that some of the new reform notions touching 
these matters will ultimately work improvements, but as yet. 
where such so-called reforms are in the fullest operation, 
nothing has been accomplished in either the selection of men. 
or in the enactment of laws, to justify such an expectation. 

So too, it may be said, that from the Ijeginning of our 
Government until long after Mr. Lincoln's day it was a 
maxim with all political parties "that people was best gov- 
erned that was least governed." 

It may be confidently asserted that he lived anri died in 
that belief. 

It has now, however, apparently become a maxim that that 
people is best governed that is most governed. 

At any rate for the last decade we have been passing rapid- 
ly from government according to general principles to gov- 
ernment by specific regulation for every detail of every con- 
ceivable business, habit or practice, with which we are con- 
cerned. 

No session of the Legislature, or of the Congress, seems 
willing to adjourn any more until it has enacted hundreds, 
and in many cases even thousands, of new statutes ; as though 
in the mere making of new laws a panacea could be found 
for all our ills. 

17 



As a part of this program, we have been made familiar 
with Government by ahiiost innumerable Commissions and Of- 
ficial Boards and Bureaus of one kind and another. 

These agencies have been so greatly multiplied here in Ohio 
I hat both their number and the public expense incurred by 
them and on their account, have grown almost beyond 
knowledge; certainly beyond common knowledge. We now 
have a Printing Commission, a Dairy and Food Commission, 
a Fish and Game Commission, a Public Utilities Commission, 
an Industrial Commission, a Rural Credits Commission, a 
Public Highways Commission, a Civil Service Commis- 
sion, and a Tax Commission. In addition we have Boards 
of one kind and another, almost without limit. The Board 
of Administration, the Board of Arbitration, the Board 
of Health, the Board of Pardons, the Board of Public Works, 
the Board of Medical Registration, the Board of Pharmacy, 
the Board of Boiler Rules and the Liquor Licensing Board, 
together with the Bureau of Vital Statistics, the Building and 
Loan Bureau, the Bureau of Inspection and Supervision of 
Public Offices ; and perhaps others that I do not now recall. 
All have been created by statutes that are in full force and 
effect, with not only their long list of high salaried members, 
but also with their almost unending payroll of subordinates. 
They all hold their positions under the authority or super- 
vision of the Governor, not, of course, for the purpose of 
creating a political machine, as has been charged, but because 
the people, who are supposed to be capable, on the one hand, 
of enacting intelligently the most important and complicated 
legislation, are yet, on the other hand, according to some of 
the propositions advanced, incapable of electing, as hereto- 
fore, our Road Supervisors, our Tax Assessors, and our 
District School Directors, all of whom, under this new order 
of things, must be appointed by the Governor, or by those 
whom he appoints, or by somebody else. 

All of these Boards and Commissions and Bureaus have 
important duties to perform, but there was a time when we 



18 



got along xvithout their help and with quite as satisfactory re- 
sults as those we have today; and much more economically. 

For some reason the tax rate for State purposes has almost 
doubled as compared with what it was only recently; largely 
due, as it has been stated upon apparently good authority, to 
the fact that appropriations are made for the work of these 
several Boards and agencies in lump sums to be distributed as 
they may respectively decide, instead of item by item, as was 
the practice in that elder time, from which it appears to be 
the chief labor of the so-called progressive spirit of today to 
carry us as far as possible. 

If there were nothing more to be said against this innova- 
tion than the increased expenses of our Government on ac- 
count of it, it would be sufficient to admonish us to make 
haste slowly in the creation of any more commissions or 
boards, or bureaus ; but there is more than the increased ex- 
pense to be urged in objection. 

In this way the functions of Government have been so 
multiplied, and thousands of minor officials have been so in- 
truded into the affairs of the people, that freedom of action 
has been almost lost, and it is no uncommon thing to hear 
of the most law abiding of our citizens finding themselves en- 
snared in the meshes of laws, of the existence of which they 
had no knowledge until charged with their violation. 

It would be fortunate if a halt could be called upon this 
practice of multiplying laws for the regulations of the minor 
details of life, and business. But the spirit that prompts such 
legislation is not content to deal with Statutes. It seeks to 
lay hold upon the permanent pillars of our Institutions. 

Our Constitutions, State and National, which were by our 
fathers properly confined to broad declarations of principle 
to guide us in legislation are being re-written, not in concise 
language expressing basic ideas, as Constitutions should be 
written, but practically in statutory fonn, with tedious speci- 
fications and details that deter and hinder appropriate legis- 
lation on the one hand, and on the other hand are tending 
to revolutionize and destroy representative government, and 

19 



thus carry us backward to the failures of the pure Democra- 
cies of antiquity. 

All this has been done under a pretense of progress. 

No one would knowingly opi>ose the upward and forward 
march of mankind, but "as all that glitters is not gold", so, 
too, mere movement is not necessarily progress. It depends 
upon the further question in which direction are you going, 
backward or forward? Going backward can not be going 
forward ; neither can it be progress ; but especially in our case 
it is only folly and a crime against good government. 

Many of these so-called reforms have been fastened upon 
us in Ohio. Here, as elsewhere, they are proving irksome, 
troublesome, inefficient, and in many respects wholly unneces- 
sary. 

It is some satisfaction to be able to recall that all this work 
has been done by a small minority of the qualified electors of 
our State. 

It was by a small minority that our late Constitutional Con- 
vention was authorized; and by a small minority that its 
work was adopted. Minority Rule is rarely satisfactory. It 
is always un-American ; but there is always one consolation 
with respect to it, and that is, that when the majority become 
aroused they can undo what has been done. 

It is to be hoped that in time the majority of the people of 
Ohio will realize what their neglect has permitted, and that 
as a result, in the discharge of their duties of citizenship, they 
will restore to us, without blot or blemish, the government 
which our fathers gave us, and which experience has proved 
to be the most successful free, popular government the world 
has ever known. 

EXECUTIVE ENCROACHMENT. 

But there is more to be noticed and criticised in the tend- 
ency of the times than this undue attempt to enact a statute 
for each specific complaint some one may happen to make; 
more than the creation of Commissions, and Boards and 

20 



Bureaus, almost without limit, to execute such laws; and 
more than the increase of taxation to support and enforce 
such measures and such agencies. I refer particularly to 
executive encroachment upon the legislative department of our 
Government. 

Our several departments were intended to be separate, inde- 
l>endent and co-ordinate. Neither has a right to infringe 
upon the scope of duty and authority of either of the others. 
The legislative bodies are supposed to directly represent the 
people, and to put into the form of law whatever they, as the 
people's representatives, may approve. The judiciary is the 
independent interpreter of the laws, constitutional and stat- 
utory, that the people may make, and as such the protector 
of the people's rights. The primary purpose of the executive 
is to execute and enforce the laws the people, through their 
representatives may enact. The Executive has the additional 
right and privilege of recommending from time to time such 
legislation as he may deem appropriate and for the best inter- 
ests of the people, and he has the additional right and duty 
of vetoing such legislation as he does not approve; but with 
the sole exception of recommendation and veto, he has no 
power except only to execute. 

He is in no sense whatever a Ruler and has no right or 
authority to use patronage, either to bestow it or to deny it, 
for the purpose of enforcing legislative action that he may 
desire, or to prevent action he does not approve. 

During the recent years, however, the practice has grown 
of the President and the Governor bringing forward legis- 
lative propositions which they not only recommend, but de- 
mand, and of which they actively try to force the enact- 
ment. In this behalf there has been a use and a misuse of 
the power of patronage, and the exercise of the executive 
influence, never practiced in the earlier day of the Republic, 
or of this Commonwealth, which has been acquiesced in be- 
cause "no harm was done." 

I do not speak of this in any partisan way because the 
practice has been resorted to by the Executives of both par- 

21 



ties; but it needs no argument to support the proposition that 
such action is dangerous and inconsistent with the theory of 
our Government. 

President Roosevelt, President Taft, and President Wilson 
have all resorted with good intentions, of course, to this 
practice. 

THE PANAMA CANAL. 

I mention this because just now it is being announced in 
the newspapers, in telegrams from Washington, that the Presi- 
dent has decided that the Act passed by the last Congress, 
discriminating in favor of American vessels engaged in the 
coast-wise trade, with respect to tolls to be collected for pass- 
ing through the Panama Canal, must be repealed, on the 
ground that it is inconsistent with the provisions of the 
Treaty with Great Britain, under which that Canal was con- 
structed. Judging by what President Wilson did to secure 
the enactment of a tariff law, in accordance with his ideas, 
and a currency act satisfactory to himself it may be feared, 
if not presumed, that in like manner he will undertake to 
force this legislation. 

I had something to do with the ratification of the Hay- 
Pauncefote Treaty. I know that, so far as some of the Sen- 
ators were concerned, it was never intended that the United 
States should be deprived by any of its provisions of the 
right and power to discriminate in the matter of tolls in favor 
of American vessels, if we should at any time desire to do so ; 
either those engaged in the coast-wise trade or those engaged 
in foreign commerce ; for the "equality" provision does not 
apply to the United States, and therefore not to our vessels 
o'f any class, either domestic, foreign or war; and I am clear 
in my recollection that a majority of the Senators, who 
ratified that treaty at that time, shared this view. 

Without regard to what individual Senators may have 
thought, and looking only to a proper construction of the 
language employed in the Treaty, President Taft was right 
when he concluded that, as a question of power, the United 

22 



States Government had an unquestioned right, under the 
Treaty, to make the discrimination with respect to our vessels 
engaged in our coast-wise trade, that was made by the act 
President Wilson is asking Congress to repeal, and that there 
was no violation whatever of our Treaty stipulation in mak- 
ing such discrimination. 

The basis of the claim that we have no right to discriminate 
in favor of our own vessels is the provision found in the 
third article of the treaty that the canal shall be open to the 
"vessels of commerce and war of all nations observing the 
rules" which we are to prescribe for the government of the 
canal "on terms of entire equality," etc. 

If this were all that is found in the Treaty applicable to 
the question there would not, of course, be any room for 
argument. The British claim that we had cut ourselves off 
from power to discriminate with respect to our own Canal 
would be conclusive; but happily there are other provisions 
of this same article that must be considered in this connection. 

In the first place, it is provided that the United States Gov- 
ernment, constructing the canal at its cost, "should have and 
enjoy," subject to the provisions of the Treaty, "all the rights 
incident to such construction, as well as the exclusive right 
of providing for the regulation and management of the 
c-anal". If this means anything at all it means that we, build- 
ing the canal and paying for the canal without any co-part- 
nership with anybody and without any help from anybody, 
were to have all the rights incident to ownership, which would 
include the right to make such use of the canal as we might 
see fit, unless by some other provision we deprived ourselves 
of that right. There is no other such restrictive provision. 

But it is further provided in the same article that "the canal 
shall never be blockaded, nor shall any right of war be exer- 
cised, nor shall any act of hostility be committed within it." 

If we are prohibited from discriminating as to tolls, we are 
also, of necessity, prohibited by this provision from blockading 
the canal or exercising any right of war or any act of hos- 
tility in the canal ; and this is technically true, although our 

23 



enemy, in case of war, might seek to fight us there and even 
to destroy the canal. 

But it is still further provided in this same article that 
"vessels of w^ar of a belligerent shall not revictual nor take 
any stores in the canal except so far as may be strictly 
necessary." If we should get into a war with Japan or Ger- 
many or au}?^ other nation except Great Britain, we would 
find ourselves prohibited by this provision, if the contention 
be true that we are included among the "all nations," 
and that we have no power to favor our own vessels, from 
taking on food supplies or stores of any kind in the canal. 

It is also further provided in this same article that "no 
belligerent shall embark or disembark troops, munitions of 
war, or warlike materials in the canal." 

This would prohibit us from supplying the fortifications 
which we are now placing- there with ammunition and gims 
to be used in the protection of our property against a nation, 
other than Great Britain, with whom we might engage in war. 
I say "other than Great Britain" because Great Britain is the 
only party wMth us to the treaty and in case of war with her 
the treaty would be suspended during the war. But it would 
not be suspended if we should be at war with Japan, Germany, 
France or any other nation. 

It is further provided in this same article that all these pro- 
visions "shall apply to waters adjacent to the canal, within 
three marine miles of either end," and that "vessels of war 
of a belligerent shall not remain in such waters longer than 
24 hours at any one time," etc. 

In short, if the contention be true that we have deprived 
ourselves of the power to discriminate in favor of our ships 
as to tolls, we have also deprived ourselves of the right in time 
of war with any nation on earth, except only Great Britain, 
to maintain our forts and supply them with ammunition and 
guns or to commit any act of hostility or act of war within 
the canal or to allow one of our warships to remain within 
the contiguous waters at either terminus of the canal longer 
than 24 hours. 

Carried to its logical and ultimate result, a violation by 
us of any of these prohibitions or restrictions would forfeit 
our right to use tlie canal on any terms whatever. 

24 



The result would be that at a cost of more than four 
hundred millions of dollars, without any help from anybody, 
and without any co-partnership with anybody, we have con- 
structed this great work and bound ourselves to forever 
maintain and operate it, at our sole exjjense, without any 
right or power to show the slightest favor to any of our 
vessels of war or commerce, either coast-wise or of foreign 
commerce. 

Stated in another way we are to be the st^le bearers of the 
great burdens that must l)e borne without any benefit that 
does not accrue to every other nation, whose vessels may have 
occasion to use the canal. 

In all this I am speaking of the question of '"power" and 
not the question of "policy." It may be wise for us, as a 
mere matter of policy, to practice such altruism. But the 
treaty does not require it, and it would be most unwise to 
concede it. 

All these provisions are natural and proper when applied 
to nations that are not parties to the Treaty and have no 
interest in the canal except such as we allow, and no respon- 
sibility or expense on account of the maintenance or oj^era- 
tion of the canal, but they are little short of imbecilic if 
applied to the United States. T do not believe any Senator 
who voted to ratify the Treaty had any such understanding 
of the language employed. I know I did not." In addition 
I have a personal recollection with respect to this matter that 
confirms the construction for which I contend. 

As an evidence that I am not speaking in any partisan way 
simply that I may ojipose the view now taken by President 
AVilson, I take the liberty of stating that as long ago as 
August 4, 1912, I had occasion to write a letter on this subject 
in which, although there somewhat imperfectly stated, I ex- 
pressed the same general views and the same conclusions I 
am now announcing. 

There was the same kind of objection when our government 
determined to fortify the Canal, but that objection was so 
completely answered upon not only reason and the record, 

25 



but also, out of the mouths of official representatives of Great 
Britain that our contention was finally established. 

To have conceded then that we were wrong, for the sake 
of avoiding controversy, would have been a surrender, if not 
a betrayal of the rights of the United States. 

To yield to the objection now made will be equally a sur- 
render, if not betrayal of most important rights. 

At the expense of repeating; the Panama Canal was con- 
structed by the United States without co-partnership with 
anybody, and primarily in the interest of the United States 
having regard to both our National defense and our National 
Commerce. 

Whether it be good policy or bad policy to now assert our 
right to discriminate in favor of our own shipping may be a 
debatable question, but the right having been asserted should 
not be abandoned. 

I sincerely hope, therefore, that President Wilson will not 
undertake to use the influence of his great office in any way, 
except by recommendation, to secure the repeal of a law, 
which in my judgment, was clearly within the right of Con- 
gress to enact without any violation of any treaty or other 
obligation. 

This is not a partisan question. Nothing connected with 
the construction of the Panama Canal has been partisan. 
Democrats and Republicans alike supported the Treaty that 
was finally enacted before the Canal was authorized ; and 
Democrats and Republicans alike participated in the legis- 
lation necessary to carry out that great work ; and Demo- 
crats and Republicans alike, forgetting party divisions and 
remembering only the interest of America, should stand 
together for the preservation of our right to carry out the 
great purpose of constructing and so operating the Canal as 
to promote American Interests of every kind and nature. 

If the representatives of the people are allowed to act upon 
their own judgment, and are not overslaughed by executive 
influence their action will be accepted without complaint; but 
if on the contrary, they be driven to deny our control of 

26 



the canal to the extent involved in the question now raised 
an injury will result that it would be hard to overestimate, 
and permanent acquiescence need not be expected. 

Congress should treat the recommendation of the Presi- 
dent with regard to this matter as, according to the theory 
of our government, it should treat every other recommenda- 
tion made by our Chief executive — with the highest respect 
and most careful consideration, but, nevertheless, Congress 
should remember that Presidents are not always right ; they 
sometimes make mistakes. It should, therefore, feel free 
to discharge its responsibilities according to its own judg- 
ment, and if it shall find, as I am sure it can and should 
that the Act complained of was witliin the power reserved 
to our government, it should not sacrifice or compromise 
that power. The}- should in such event unhesitatingly 
refuse to comply with the President's recommendation as 
other Congresses have refused to follow Presidential recom- 
mendations in hundreds of other cases. 

Thus our rights will be maintained and the wisdom of 
our fathers in providing the checks and balances that dis- 
tinguish our form of Government will have another vindi- 
cation of the most important character and the most strik- 
ing value. 



77 



APPENDIX 



IIAY-PAUNCEFOTE TREATY. 

The United States of America and His Majesty Edward the Seventh 
of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of the British 
Dominions beyond the Seas, King, and Emperor of India, being desirous 
to facilitate the construction of a ship canal to connect the Atlantic and 
Pacific Oceans, by whatever route may be considered expedient, and to 
that end to remove any objection which may arise out of the Convention 
of the 19th April, 1850, commonly called the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, to 
the construction of such canal under the auspices of the Government of 
the United States, without impairing the "general principle" of neutraliza- 
tion established in Article VIII of that Convention, have for that purpose 
appointed as their Plenipotentiaries : 

The President of the United States, John Hay, Secretary of State of 
the United States of America ; 

And His Majesty Edward the Seventh, of the United Kingdom of 
Great Britain and Ireland, and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, 
King, and Emperor of India, the Right Honourable Lord Pauncefote, 
G. C. B., G. C. M. G., His Majesty's Ambassador Extraordinary and 
Plenipotentiary to the United States ; 

Who, having communicated to each other their full powers, which were 
found to be in due and proper form, have agreed upon the following 
Articles : 

Article I. 

The high contracting parties agree that the present treaty shall supersede 
the aforementioned convention of the 19th April, 1850. 



Article II. 

It is agreed that the canal may be constructed under the auspices of 
the Government of the United States either directly at its own cost, or 
by gift or loan of money to individuals or corporations, or through sub- 
scription to or purchase of stock or shares, and that, subject to the 
provisions of the present treaty, the said Government shall have and 
enjoy all the rights incident to such construction, as well as the exclusive 
right of providing for the regulation and management of the canal. 

Article III. 

The United States adopts, as the basis of the neutralization of such 
ship canal, the following rules, substantially as embodied in the Con- 
vention of Constantinople, signed the 28th October, 1888, for the free 
navigation of the Suez Canal, that is to say : 

1. The canal shall be free and open to the vessels of commerce and 
of war of all nations observing these Rules, on terms of entire equality, 

28 



so that there shall be no discrimination against any such nation, or its 
citizens or subjects, in respect of the conditions or charges of traffic or 
otherwise. Such conditions and charges of traffic shall be ju^t and 
equitable. 

The canal shall never be blockaded, nor shall any right oi war be 
exercised nor any act of hostility be committed within it. llie United 
States, however, shall be at liberty to maintain such military police along 
the canal as may be necessary to protect it against lawlessness and disorder. 

3. Vessels of war of a belligerent shall not revictual nor take any 
stores in the canal except so far as may be strictly necessary; and the 
transit of such vessels through the canal shall be effected with the least 
possible delay in accordance with the Regulations in force, and with only 
such intermission as may result from the necessities of the service. 

Prizes shall be in all respects subject to the same rules as vessels of 
war of the belligerents. 

4. No belligerent shall embark or disembark troops, munitions of war, 
or warlike materials in the canal, except in case of accidental hindrance 
of the transit, and in such case the transit shall be resumed with all 
possible dispatch. 

5. The provisions of this article shall apply to waters adjacent to the 
canal, within three marine miles of either end. Vessels of war of a bel- 
ligerent shall not remain in such waters longer than twenty-four hours 
at any one time, except in case of distress, and in such case shall depart 
as soon as possible; but a vessel of war of one belligerent shall not 
depart within twenty-four hours from the departure of a vessel of war 
of the other belligerent. 

6. The plant, establishments, buildings, and all works necessary to 
the construction, maintenance, and operation of the canal shall be deemed 
to be part thereof, for the purposes of this treaty, and in time of war, 
as in time of peace, shall enjoy complete immunity from attack or injury 
by belligerents, and from acts calailated to impair their usefulness as 
part of the canal. 

Article IV. 

it is agreed that no change of territorial sovereignty or of interna- 
tional relations of the country or countries traversed by the before-men- 
tioned canal shall affect the general principle of neutralization or the 
obligation of the high liigh contracting parties under the present treaty. 

Article V. 

The present treaty shall be ratified by the President of the United 
States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and 
by His Britannic Majesty; and the ratifications shall be exchanged at 
Washington or at London at the earliest possible time within six months 
from the date hereof. 

In faith whereof the respective plenipotentiaries have signed this treat>' 
and hereunto affixed their seals. 

Done in duplicate at Washington, the 18th day of November, in the 
year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and one. 

John Hay. [seal.] 
Pauncefote. [seal.] 



29 



THE POWER OF THE UNITED STATES TO DISCRIMINATE IN 

FAVOR OF AMERICAN VESSELS IN THE COLLECTION 

OF TOLLS FOR PASSING THROUGH THE 

PANAMA CANAL. 

LETTER FROM 

Hon. J. B. Foraker 

TO 

Mr. S. L. Latshaw, of Toledo, Ohio. 
(As published in the Toledo Times of August 13, 1912.) 

Editor of the Times : 

Being interested in the question of allowing American vessels to pass 
through the Panama Canal free, I wrote former Senator J. B. Foraker for 
his opinion. His reply has just been received, and I believe it is of sufficient 
interest to Times readers to be printed. — S. L. Latshaw, 2801 Monroe St. 

The following is a letter from Mr. Foraker: 

South Poland, Me., August 4, 1912. 

Mr, S. L. Latshaw, 
Toledo, Ohio. 

Dear Sir : — Your letter of July 23d, asking for my opinion as to the 
power of the United States to discriminate as to tolls in favor of vessels 
belonging to our citizens, passing through the Panama Canal, has reached 
me here. 

'i'hat question is now being debated in the United States Senate. The 
newspaper reports of the speeches that have been made are rather meager, 
and I have no documents to which I can refer to refresh my recollection 
as to many important facts. 

I hesitate, in view of these conditions, to take exception to anything 
so able a lawyer and Senator as Mr. Root has seen fit to say, but I am 
quite sure he has taken a widely different view of the effect of the language 
employed in the Hay-Pauncefote treaty from that which should have been 
given it. The language referred to is the provision that the vessels of 
commerce and of war of all nations shall have a right to use the canal on 
terms of equality. 

Of course, if this language stood alone, it would admit of the con- 
struction Great Britain has put on it in making the contention she is now 
making, and Mr. Root would be right in taking the position I understand 
he has taken ; but this language does not stand alone. Taking into con- 
■iideration the context, it seems perfectly clear to me now, as it did when 
I voted to ratify the treaty, that this restriction and others of a similar 
character found in that treaty did not apply to the United States, because 
the United States was to be the owner of the canal and was proposing 
to build it with our own money, without any help from anybody, and 
Ijecanse all obligations of a co-partnership character created by the Clayton- 
Bulwer treaty had been abrogated by the abrogation of that treaty, and 

30 



because it would be absurd to apply to the United States a number of 
the restrictions to which I refer, all of which would be applicable to the 
United States, if the one relied upon by Great Britain be applicable. 

For instance, one of the provisions is: That a warship ot a belligerent 
shall not remain in the waters contiguous to either terminus of the canal 
longer than twenty-four hours. 1 am not quoting the language, but only 
the effect of it. 

It would certainly be absurd to apply this provision to the United 
States, since the result might be that one of our battleships passing from 
one coast to the other would have not only to hurry through the canal 
to the waters contiguous, but also emerge therefrom within the limited 
lime mentioned, although there might be a half-dozen warships of the 
enemy lying in wait to capture or destroy her the moment she made her 
appearance. According to my recollection this very question (of right to 
discriminate in favor of our own ships) was raised by an amendment 
offered to the treaty, which amendment was voted down overwhelmingly, 
because it was thought unnecessary to specify that a provision of such a 
character did not apply to us who were building the canal, and were to 
have with respect to it the usual rights of ownership and all the rights 
of regulation.* 

Without going over everything in tedious detail, there are other restric- 
tions found in the treaty to support this view, along with a general but 
specific provision, as just indicated, that our government shall have all 
the rights incidental to the construction and ownership of the canal, as 
well as the exclusive right of providing for its regulation and management. 

The provisions giving rise to this contention were adopted from the 
convention of Constantinople, providing for the neutralization of the 
Suez Canal. The Suez Canal was constructed and is owned by a private 
corporation, although Great Britain controls it by ownership of a majority 
of its stock. 

The restrictions under consideration now were never regarded as 
applicable to the Suez Canal Company. Of course, that company is not 
a nation and does not own any ships of war, although it may own vessels 
of commerce, but the reason these restrictions were never held applicable 
to the Suez Canal Company were not because it lacked ownership of 
vessels of war or vessels of commerce, but only because it would be in- 
consistent with the rights of ownership to give that convention any sach 
construction. The United States holds the same relation to the stipula- 
tions under consideration that the Suez Canal Company holds to the 
same stipulation in the Constantinople convention. 

The subject is one of great iinportance. It was necessary that it should 
be considered by the Senate in executive session, where no record is 
made or kept of the debates that are held. For that reason everyone who 
participated in those debates must rely upon his own recollection as to 
what occurred, and must submit to the rules that govern the construction 
of legal documents as to what is approved. 

According to both of these guides, I am clearly of the opinion that 
whatever may be a wise policy, about which I have no occasion to speak 
in answering your letter, there can not be any question about the power 
of our government to discriminate as to tolls in favor of the American 
owned ships passing through the Panama Canal, and I should regard it 
as a great misfortune, if our government should hesitate to stand firmly 
and uncompromisingly by this proposition. 

If our government does not have this right, but is under obligation to 
give to our ships only such rights and privileges as she gives to all others, 
then surely it is in order to ask what we are building the canal for? Is it 
possible that we are spending three or four hundred millions of dollars. 



* And for the further reason that to exempt one class of ships would 
imply that other classes were not exempt. 

31 



and obligating ourselves to fortify, and maintain in successful operation, 
this majestic work after it has been completed, w-ithout any special 
advantage to ourselves, but merely for the common benefit of all the 
sea-going nations of the world, among which nations we are one of the 
least? There is a preposterous absurdity in such a conclusion, and I 
should feel deeply mortified to think that I had favored and supported a 
measure that was capable of such a construction. 

I would be glad to say much more that comes to mind in answering 
your polite inquiry, but I feel I have said enough to satisfy you as to the 
opinions I entertain, and to give you the grounds upon w^hich they rest. 
To deal with the subject fully would require me to go far beyond the 
limitations of a letter. 

I think it well to add, however, that we are not, in my opinion, bound 
by any treaty to arbitrate any such question at the Hague or elsewhere. 
All such questions are specifically excepted from the general operation of 
all our compulsory treaties of arbitration. 

Yours very truly, J. B. Foraker. 



32 

N60 






.^'\ ' 



^^ ^^ 








